P3D Re: Competitions suppressing creativity?

[Michael Watters <mwatters@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John W Roberts) writes:

>>way. To pressure people to take "good" stereo photographs, and to define "good"
>>as "likely to win a stereo photo competition", inhibits creativity and runs
>>the risk of discouraging innovation. 


Very true.   That's one of the reasons I stopped submitting photos into contests when I was still in  
the Seattle club.  The judging was erratic (a result of the fact that art is a subjective thing,  
combined with a total lack of standards in the judging.  For the most part they just hand the  
person a judging control and tell them to give it a score.)   It never seemed to make sense with  
what I enjoyed personally.  Photos that were the slightest bit experimental were always trashed  
in the judging (not only mine, but others too).

Photos that traditionally did well:
   Macros of flowers
   Nice scenics.

Basically, postcard photos.  Pleasant to the eye in the same way a hershey bar is pleasant in  
your mouth.  Nothing more.  Only RARELY did I see something beyond that do at all decently.

The various "rules" that people have to decided to impose on stereo photography leave  
precious little room for innovation.  2D photographers have long ago abandoned the idea that  
the only lens to use is a "normal" one, they recognise that a limited DOF is useful for isolating  
the subject, soft-focus can be good at times, grain can be used etc etc.  But step into the 3D  
region and all the above are (or have been commonly) attacked as is they were evil.   The  
reality is that there are no rules.  There's only guidelines, and most of those are mainly meant to  
produce eye-candy.  Pleasant to the eye, postcard shots.   Something that I for one have seen  
enough of.

mike
watters


------------------------------